US20190137472A1 - Detection and quantification of gas mixtures in subterranean formations - Google Patents
Detection and quantification of gas mixtures in subterranean formations Download PDFInfo
- Publication number
- US20190137472A1 US20190137472A1 US16/234,850 US201816234850A US2019137472A1 US 20190137472 A1 US20190137472 A1 US 20190137472A1 US 201816234850 A US201816234850 A US 201816234850A US 2019137472 A1 US2019137472 A1 US 2019137472A1
- Authority
- US
- United States
- Prior art keywords
- gas mixture
- carbon
- gas
- thermal maturity
- determining
- Prior art date
- Legal status (The legal status is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the status listed.)
- Granted
Links
- 239000000203 mixture Substances 0.000 title claims abstract description 231
- 230000015572 biosynthetic process Effects 0.000 title claims description 26
- 238000005755 formation reaction Methods 0.000 title description 22
- 238000011002 quantification Methods 0.000 title description 4
- 238000001514 detection method Methods 0.000 title description 2
- 238000000034 method Methods 0.000 claims abstract description 80
- 239000007789 gas Substances 0.000 claims description 273
- OKTJSMMVPCPJKN-UHFFFAOYSA-N Carbon Chemical compound [C] OKTJSMMVPCPJKN-UHFFFAOYSA-N 0.000 claims description 111
- 229910052799 carbon Inorganic materials 0.000 claims description 111
- ATUOYWHBWRKTHZ-UHFFFAOYSA-N Propane Chemical group CCC ATUOYWHBWRKTHZ-UHFFFAOYSA-N 0.000 claims description 26
- VNWKTOKETHGBQD-UHFFFAOYSA-N methane Chemical group C VNWKTOKETHGBQD-UHFFFAOYSA-N 0.000 claims description 18
- OTMSDBZUPAUEDD-UHFFFAOYSA-N Ethane Chemical group CC OTMSDBZUPAUEDD-UHFFFAOYSA-N 0.000 claims description 15
- 238000011084 recovery Methods 0.000 claims description 15
- 239000001294 propane Substances 0.000 claims description 13
- 239000011435 rock Substances 0.000 claims description 8
- 239000012530 fluid Substances 0.000 claims description 7
- 238000005553 drilling Methods 0.000 claims description 6
- 208000035126 Facies Diseases 0.000 claims description 3
- 238000007872 degassing Methods 0.000 claims description 2
- 238000004458 analytical method Methods 0.000 abstract description 9
- 230000008901 benefit Effects 0.000 abstract description 8
- 230000000155 isotopic effect Effects 0.000 abstract description 7
- 238000007796 conventional method Methods 0.000 abstract description 4
- 238000004519 manufacturing process Methods 0.000 description 13
- 229930195733 hydrocarbon Natural products 0.000 description 12
- 150000002430 hydrocarbons Chemical class 0.000 description 12
- 238000002347 injection Methods 0.000 description 10
- 239000007924 injection Substances 0.000 description 10
- 238000005070 sampling Methods 0.000 description 7
- 239000000126 substance Substances 0.000 description 7
- XLYOFNOQVPJJNP-UHFFFAOYSA-N water Substances O XLYOFNOQVPJJNP-UHFFFAOYSA-N 0.000 description 6
- 239000000700 radioactive tracer Substances 0.000 description 5
- 239000004215 Carbon black (E152) Substances 0.000 description 4
- NNPPMTNAJDCUHE-UHFFFAOYSA-N isobutane Chemical compound CC(C)C NNPPMTNAJDCUHE-UHFFFAOYSA-N 0.000 description 4
- 238000012986 modification Methods 0.000 description 4
- 230000004048 modification Effects 0.000 description 4
- IJDNQMDRQITEOD-UHFFFAOYSA-N n-butane Chemical compound CCCC IJDNQMDRQITEOD-UHFFFAOYSA-N 0.000 description 4
- 230000008569 process Effects 0.000 description 3
- 238000004891 communication Methods 0.000 description 2
- 239000000470 constituent Substances 0.000 description 2
- 239000001282 iso-butane Substances 0.000 description 2
- 235000013847 iso-butane Nutrition 0.000 description 2
- 239000003208 petroleum Substances 0.000 description 2
- 230000004075 alteration Effects 0.000 description 1
- 238000013459 approach Methods 0.000 description 1
- 230000004888 barrier function Effects 0.000 description 1
- 238000006065 biodegradation reaction Methods 0.000 description 1
- 238000006243 chemical reaction Methods 0.000 description 1
- CRQQGFGUEAVUIL-UHFFFAOYSA-N chlorothalonil Chemical compound ClC1=C(Cl)C(C#N)=C(Cl)C(C#N)=C1Cl CRQQGFGUEAVUIL-UHFFFAOYSA-N 0.000 description 1
- 238000010276 construction Methods 0.000 description 1
- 238000005336 cracking Methods 0.000 description 1
- 230000001186 cumulative effect Effects 0.000 description 1
- 238000005520 cutting process Methods 0.000 description 1
- 238000013461 design Methods 0.000 description 1
- 238000009826 distribution Methods 0.000 description 1
- 230000003993 interaction Effects 0.000 description 1
- 238000005259 measurement Methods 0.000 description 1
- 230000007246 mechanism Effects 0.000 description 1
- 230000005012 migration Effects 0.000 description 1
- 238000013508 migration Methods 0.000 description 1
- 238000005457 optimization Methods 0.000 description 1
- 230000035699 permeability Effects 0.000 description 1
- 230000002285 radioactive effect Effects 0.000 description 1
- 238000006467 substitution reaction Methods 0.000 description 1
- 238000010408 sweeping Methods 0.000 description 1
- 238000005406 washing Methods 0.000 description 1
Images
Classifications
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G01—MEASURING; TESTING
- G01N—INVESTIGATING OR ANALYSING MATERIALS BY DETERMINING THEIR CHEMICAL OR PHYSICAL PROPERTIES
- G01N33/00—Investigating or analysing materials by specific methods not covered by groups G01N1/00 - G01N31/00
- G01N33/24—Earth materials
- G01N33/241—Earth materials for hydrocarbon content
-
- E—FIXED CONSTRUCTIONS
- E21—EARTH OR ROCK DRILLING; MINING
- E21B—EARTH OR ROCK DRILLING; OBTAINING OIL, GAS, WATER, SOLUBLE OR MELTABLE MATERIALS OR A SLURRY OF MINERALS FROM WELLS
- E21B49/00—Testing the nature of borehole walls; Formation testing; Methods or apparatus for obtaining samples of soil or well fluids, specially adapted to earth drilling or wells
- E21B49/005—Testing the nature of borehole walls or the formation by using drilling mud or cutting data
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G01—MEASURING; TESTING
- G01N—INVESTIGATING OR ANALYSING MATERIALS BY DETERMINING THEIR CHEMICAL OR PHYSICAL PROPERTIES
- G01N33/00—Investigating or analysing materials by specific methods not covered by groups G01N1/00 - G01N31/00
- G01N33/0004—Gaseous mixtures, e.g. polluted air
- G01N33/0009—General constructional details of gas analysers, e.g. portable test equipment
- G01N33/0027—General constructional details of gas analysers, e.g. portable test equipment concerning the detector
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G01—MEASURING; TESTING
- G01N—INVESTIGATING OR ANALYSING MATERIALS BY DETERMINING THEIR CHEMICAL OR PHYSICAL PROPERTIES
- G01N33/00—Investigating or analysing materials by specific methods not covered by groups G01N1/00 - G01N31/00
- G01N33/26—Oils; Viscous liquids; Paints; Inks
- G01N33/28—Oils, i.e. hydrocarbon liquids
- G01N33/2823—Raw oil, drilling fluid or polyphasic mixtures
Definitions
- the present invention relates generally to methods and systems for determining relative quantities of gas mixtures in a reservoir compartment of a subterranean formation. More particularly, but not by way of limitation, embodiments of the present invention include methods and systems for quantifying contributions to gas mixtures in a reservoir compartment by way of isotopic analyses.
- Secondary recovery operations are often employed to enhance recovery of the hydrocarbons remaining in the subterranean formations.
- Secondary recovery operations usually refer to the second stage of hydrocarbon production, during which an external fluid such as water or gas is injected into the reservoir through injection wells located in the formation that is in fluid and pressure communication with the production wells.
- the purpose of secondary recovery is to maintain reservoir pressure and to displace hydrocarbons toward the producing wellbore.
- the most common secondary recovery techniques are gas injection and waterflooding. Normally, gas and/or water is injected into the production zone to sweep oil from the reservoir or to otherwise provide a motive pressure to enhance recovery. Typically, the secondary recovery stage reaches its limit when the injected fluid (water or gas) is produced in considerable amounts from the production wells and the production is no longer economical. Usually, the successive use of primary recovery and secondary recovery in an oil reservoir produces about 15% to 40% of the original oil in place.
- compositional techniques usually fail to adequately determine the relative contributions of these gas mixtures, because the naturally-occurring gas mixtures often contain one or more of the same components as the injected gas mixtures. Even where compositional techniques can provide some estimation of the relative contributions of each gas mixture, these technique estimates are too often unacceptably inaccurate.
- this conventional method is largely a qualitative determination and suffers from being unable to provide decent quantitative estimations of the relative amount of injected gas in the extracted hydrocarbons. Due to this method being notoriously unreliable for quantitative determinations, its use to date has been confined mostly to presence determinations and for qualitative assessments. Additionally, the tracer method is extremely expensive, making its use highly undesirable from a cost standpoint.
- the externally-introduced reservoir gas may be any gas that was introduced into the reservoir from some outside source and generally refers to any gas that was not naturally-formed or found in the production reservoir.
- the conventional methods for addressing this more general problem suffers from the same limitations as the aforementioned prior art methods.
- the present invention relates generally to methods and systems for determining relative quantities of gases contributing to gas mixtures in a reservoir compartment of a subterranean formation. More particularly, but not by way of limitation, embodiments of the present invention include methods and systems for quantifying contributions of gas mixtures in a reservoir compartment by way of isotopic analyses.
- One example of a method for determining relative contributions of a plurality of gas mixtures to a reservoir compartment of a subterranean formation comprises the steps of: (a) externally injecting a secondary gas mixture in the subterranean formation; (b) determining a first gas thermal maturity (R o _ A ) of a first gas mixture, wherein the first gas mixture contributes to a commingled gas mixture in the reservoir compartment; (c) determining a second gas thermal maturity (R o _ B ) of a second gas mixture, wherein the second gas mixture contributes to a commingled gas mixture in the reservoir compartment; (d) obtaining a plurality of samples of the commingled gas mixture at a plurality of depths, the commingled gas mixture at each depth characterized by a plurality of components, wherein the plurality of components comprises a plurality of carbon-based components, wherein each carbon-based component comprises a plurality of stable carbon isotopes; (e) analyzing
- One example of a method for determining relative contributions of a plurality of gas mixtures to a reservoir compartment of a subterranean formation comprises the steps of: (a) determining a first gas thermal maturity (R o _ A ) of a first gas mixture, wherein the first gas mixture contributes to a commingled gas mixture in the reservoir compartment; (b) determining a second gas thermal maturity (R o _ B ) of a second gas mixture, wherein the second gas mixture contributes to a commingled gas mixture in the reservoir compartment; (c) obtaining a plurality of samples of the commingled gas mixture at a plurality of depths, the commingled gas mixture at each depth characterized by a plurality of components, wherein the plurality of components comprises a plurality of carbon-based components, wherein each carbon-based component comprises a plurality of stable carbon isotopes; (d) analyzing each of the samples to determine a stable carbon isotope value ( ⁇ 13 C) of
- a method for determining relative contributions of a plurality of gas mixtures to the commingled gas mixture in a reservoir compartment of a subterranean formation comprises the steps of: (a) receiving a first gas thermal maturity (R o _ A ) of a first gas mixture, wherein the first gas mixture contributes to a commingled gas mixture in the reservoir compartment; (b) receiving a second gas thermal maturity (R o _ B ) of a second gas mixture, wherein the second gas mixture contributes to a commingled gas mixture in the reservoir compartment; (c) receiving a stable carbon isotope value ( ⁇ 13 C) for two or more of the carbon-based components at each of the wellbore depths; (d) determine a ⁇ 13 C ratio
- FIG. 1A illustrates a wellbore disposed in a subterranean formation intersecting a plurality of reservoirs in accordance with one embodiment of the present invention.
- FIG. 1B illustrates a wellbore disposed in a subterranean formation intersecting a reservoir in accordance with one embodiment of the present invention.
- FIG. 2 illustrates a flow chart for a method for quantifying contributions of gas mixtures in a reservoir compartment in accordance with one embodiment of the present invention.
- FIG. 3 illustrates an alternative embodiment of method 300 for quantifying contributions of gas mixtures to a reservoir compartment in accordance with one embodiment of the present invention.
- FIG. 4 shows a plot of a thermal maturity trend line against a graph of stable carbon isotope values ( ⁇ 13 C) of ethane versus stable carbon isotope values ( ⁇ 13 C) of propane.
- the present invention relates generally to methods and systems for determining relative quantities of gas mixtures in a reservoir compartment of a subterranean formation. More particularly, but not by way of limitation, embodiments of the present invention include methods and systems for quantifying contributions of gas mixtures in a reservoir compartment by way of isotopic analyses.
- the methods and systems disclosed herein rely in part on the differing thermal maturities of the different gas mixtures to estimate the relative quantity of each gas mixture present in the total gas mixture. This method may be carried out at each depth to determine relative contributions of each gas mixture to the total gas mixture along the depth or length of a wellbore.
- the thermal maturities of each gas may be estimated by lab analysis and/or by reference to stable carbon isotopic analysis as described further below.
- the two gas mixtures of interest possess differing thermal maturities, due to the nature of the formation of each gas mixture under different geologic conditions.
- the methods and systems disclosed herein are capable of determining the relative contribution of each mixture to a commingled wellbore stream.
- Advantages of certain embodiments of the present invention include, but are not limited to, higher accuracies and ease of application as compared to conventional methods.
- FIG. 1A illustrates a wellbore disposed in a subterranean formation intersecting a plurality of reservoirs in accordance with one embodiment of the present invention.
- hydrocarbon producing wellbore 111 is disposed in subterranean formation 120 .
- Wellbore 110 intersects two hydrocarbon-bearing reservoir compartments 131 and 132 .
- Injection wellbore 141 is provided for injecting Gas B, which in certain embodiments may be a miscible injectant gas.
- Gas B which in certain embodiments may be a miscible injectant gas.
- Each reservoir compartment 131 and 132 possesses commingled gas mixtures that result from contributions of other gases.
- the commingled gas mixture reaching the wellbore at various depths results from the commingling of Gas A and Gas B.
- FIG. 1B illustrates a wellbore disposed in a subterranean formation intersecting a reservoir in accordance with one embodiment of the present invention.
- wellbore 110 is disposed in subterranean formation 120 and intersects reservoir compartment 131 .
- Reservoir compartment 131 may be charged with multiple gas mixtures from different sources to form a commingled gas mixture.
- a gas mixture might naturally-form in reservoir compartment 131 .
- gas mixtures may be introduced from another source external to reservoir compartment 131 . While many combinations and permutations of this sort are possible, for illustrative purposes, this example discusses a first gas mixture in reservoir compartment 131 that originated from a first source (not shown) external to reservoir compartment 131 .
- a second gas mixture also contributes to the commingled gas mixture present in reservoir compartment 131 .
- the second gas mixture may be any externally-introduced gas that is present in reservoir compartment 131 due to being introduced from some source external to reservoir compartment 131 .
- the second gas mixture may be an injected gas that is introduced into reservoir compartment 131 for the purpose of one or more secondary recovery operations.
- the second gas mixture may be a gas mixture that was introduced into reservoir compartment 131 by way of some other reservoir compartment (not shown) by natural or man-made mechanisms.
- a second gas mixture such as a miscible injectant gas is introduced via injection well 141 to sweep hydrocarbons towards producing wellbore 110 .
- the second gas mixture is preferably a miscible gas used to enhance recovery of hydrocarbons by way of a secondary recovery operation.
- the quantification methods disclosed herein rely in part on the differing thermal maturities of the first gas mixture as compared to the second gas mixture.
- the differing thermal maturities of each gas mixture are due to geochemical differences between the gas mixtures owing to either (i) different source rock facies which generated the petroleum fluids that charged the different compartments, or (ii) similar source rock facies that charged the compartments at different stages of its thermal history, or (iii) a combination of these two geologic processes.
- intra-reservoir alterations processes such as biodegradation, water washing, oil to gas cracking and other post-petroleum charge geologic processes may also affect chemical variation in the gas mixtures.
- the components of each gas mixture contain different distributions of carbon isotopes. That is, the first gas mixture may have hydrocarbon components containing more stable 13 C carbon isotope as compared to 12 C carbon isotope than the second gas mixture.
- Stable carbon isotope values referred to here are relative to the PeeDee Belemnite standard (PDB) and represented by
- these differences in carbon isotope values allow estimation of the respective thermal maturities of each gas mixture of interest (e.g. the first gas mixture, the second gas mixture, and the commingled gas mixture). Additionally, as will be described further below, ⁇ 13 C ratios of carbon isotope values of two carbon-based components may also be used to estimate the respective thermal maturities of each gas mixture. Knowing the thermal maturity of each of the gas mixtures then allows for quantitative estimation of the relative contributions of the first and second gas mixtures that produced the commingled wellbore gas mixture. These determinations may be carried out at a plurality of depths so as to estimate the relative contribution of each gas mixture as a function of wellbore depth.
- depth refers to any longitudinal length extending along a wellbore, and is not limited to vertical depths. In this way, the term, “depth,” equally applies to longitudinal wellbore lengths whether the well is vertical, deviated, or horizontal.
- the methods herein rely in part on differing thermal maturities of the first gas mixture as compared to the thermal maturity of the second gas mixture, the methods herein realize optimum efficacy when the first gas mixture and the second gas mixtures possess differing thermal maturities.
- the methods herein are capable of effectively determining relative contributions of each gas mixture to the commingled gas mixture with acceptable errors even when the thermal maturities differ from one another by no more than about 3 percent.
- the methods herein are extremely easy to implement in the field and are susceptible to being incorporated in automated devices at the wellbore site for providing logs of relative contributions of each gas as a function of wellbore depth.
- FIG. 2 illustrates a flow chart for method 200 for quantifying contributions of gas mixtures to a reservoir compartment in accordance with one embodiment of the present invention.
- Method 200 is explained with reference to the system shown in FIG. 1 .
- a first gas mixture (not shown) and a second gas mixture (not shown) each contribute to charging reservoir compartment 131 to form commingled gas mixture 115 .
- Method 200 realizes optimal efficacy when the thermal maturity of the first gas mixture differs from the thermal maturity of the second gas mixture by some threshold tolerance level.
- the threshold tolerance level is at least about 2%, at least about 3%, or at least about 5%.
- step 210 the thermal maturity (R o _ A ) of the first gas mixture is determined, and in step 212 , the thermal maturity (R o _ B ) of the second gas mixture is determined.
- This thermal maturity determination may be by way of lab analysis or other method known in the art for determining thermal maturity of a gas mixture.
- one or more stable carbon isotope values are measured and then, a thermal maturity is determined by reference to a known relationship between the stable carbon isotope value(s) and thermal maturity. In certain embodiments, this known relationship is a linear relationship.
- samples of commingled gas mixture 115 are obtained at a plurality of wellbore depths.
- the gas samples are obtained at various wellbore depth intervals as the wellbore is being drilled.
- samples may be obtained at a plurality of depths along the length of wellbore 110 .
- mixture samples may be obtained from returning rock cuttings and drilling mud 150 , which degases from mud receiving tank 151 by way of degassing tank 153 .
- mud gas 154 from the return drill fluid is sampled as substantially representative of the commingled gas mixture present at each wellbore depth being sampled.
- Sampling may be by way of a sampling apparatus 160 or by an on-site analyzer 157 .
- Sampling may be desired at frequencies sufficient to minimize sample-to-sample variability to ensure a high enough resolution of measurement (e.g. to less than about 3 percent in certain embodiments).
- sufficient sampling frequencies may vary from regular intervals of about every 5 feet, about every 10 feet, to about every 50 feet. Whichever sampling frequency is selected for a given portion of the wellbore, the wellbore sampling frequency selected should be sufficiently high to reflect any changes in reservoir architecture.
- each of the samples thus obtained are analyzed by way of isotopic analyzer 157 in step 226 to obtain stable carbon isotope values ( ⁇ 13 C) for one or more carbon-based components that make up commingled gas mixture 115 .
- sample devices 165 may be separately analyzed in an on-site or off-site laboratory as desired.
- Each of the stable carbon isotope values obtained at each wellbore depth is indicative of the thermal maturity of commingled gas mixture 115 at each respective wellbore depth.
- the higher stable carbon isotope values are indicative of hydrocarbons having higher thermal maturities.
- Thermal maturities are known to correlate well with stable carbon isotope values for each carbon-based component (e.g. with methane, ethane, propane, iso-butane, n-butane, etc.) that are found in gas mixtures. Accordingly, thermal maturities may be estimated for a given gas mixture based on a stable carbon isotope value ( ⁇ 13 C) for a particular carbon-based component (e.g. ethane) by reference to the known relationship between thermal maturity and stable carbon isotopes values.
- ⁇ 13 C stable carbon isotope value
- the relative contribution of the second gas mixture to commingled gas mixture 115 may be determined as provided in step 240 .
- the relative contribution of the first gas mixture to commingled gas mixture 115 may be determined as well.
- the relative contribution of each gas mixture may be determined by simultaneously solving this system of equations.
- the above system of equations may be any mathematically equivalent operation that yields substantially the same result, including but not limited to solving the equations algebraically.
- Other numerical techniques may be employed to solve for the unknowns x and y as well as desired.
- the term, “mathematical equivalent thereof,” as used herein, refers to any mathematical operation that solves for the relative contributions of the gas mixtures to a commingled gas mixture based on the equations described herein.
- the relative contribution of the second gas mixture is given by the relationship, (R o _ m ⁇ R o _ A )/(R o _ B ⁇ R o _ A ).
- the method thus described may also be extended to any number of gas mixtures where each gas mixture contributes to a commingled gas mixture, provided enough stable carbon isotope values are measured for enough of the components to solve for the number of unknowns inherent in the system of interest.
- FIG. 3 illustrates an alternative embodiment of method 300 for quantifying contributions of gas mixtures to a reservoir compartment in accordance with one embodiment of the present invention.
- method 300 is explained with reference to FIG. 1 .
- method 300 contemplates receiving gas thermal maturities from another entity that has independently ascertained the gas thermal maturities, as opposed to sampling and analyzing commingled gas mixture 115 . Accordingly, in step 310 a thermal maturity (R o _ A ) of a first gas mixture is received, and in step 312 , a thermal maturity (R o _ B ) of a second gas mixture is received.
- stable carbon isotope values are obtained for two or more carbon-based components corresponding to each wellbore depth.
- a stable carbon isotope value ( ⁇ 13 C) of methane and a stable carbon isotope value ( ⁇ 13 C) of ethane may be obtained corresponding to each wellbore depth.
- any pair of carbon-based components may be obtained in this fashion, such as, for example, methane/ethane, methane/propane, methane/n-butane, ethane/propane, ethane/n-butane, propane/n-butane, methane/iso-butane, and so forth.
- a ⁇ 13 C ratio is determined by evaluating a ratio of the stable carbon isotope value ( ⁇ 13 C) of the first carbon-based component to the stable carbon isotope value ( ⁇ 13 C) of the second carbon-based component. In this way, a ⁇ 13 C ratio of the ⁇ 13 C value of a first component to ⁇ 13 C of a second component is obtained corresponding to each wellbore depth.
- each of the ⁇ 13 C ratios thus obtained may be used to estimate a thermal maturity of commingled gas mixture 115 at each wellbore depth as provided in step 330 .
- the thermal maturity (R o _ m ) of commingled gas mixture 115 is determined according to a known relationship between the commingled gas mixture thermal maturity (R o _ m ) and the ⁇ 13 C ratios.
- FIG. 4 shows a plot of a thermal maturity trend line against a graph of stable carbon isotope values ( ⁇ 13 C) of ethane versus stable carbon isotope values ( ⁇ 13 C) of propane.
- An increase in R o represents an increase in thermal maturity of the gas source.
- thermal maturity increases with increasing ⁇ 13 C ratio.
- ⁇ 13 C ethane/propane ratios at a particular wellbore depth may be indicated on the same plot.
- a ⁇ 13 C ethane/propane ratio of a first gas mixture is plotted as point 491
- a ⁇ 13 C ethane/propane ratio of a second gas mixture is plotted as point 492
- a ⁇ 13 C ethane/propane ratio of commingled gas mixture is plotted as point 499 , each of these ⁇ 13 C ratios being evaluated at a particular wellbore depth.
- the thermal maturities corresponding to each of these points 491 , 492 , and 499 may be determined by projecting a line normal to thermal maturity trend line 485 and ascertaining the corresponding thermal maturity at the intersection of each normal line 481 , 482 , and 489 and trend line 485 . In this way, a thermal maturity of each gas mixture is obtained.
- the contributions of each gas mixture to commingled gas mixture 115 may be determined in step 330 in any manner similar to step 240 of method 200 .
- the methods herein allow for an integrative assessment of oil sweeping efficiency across an entire interval of interest, including newly drilled wells within the range of migration of injected miscible gas.
- the profile of thermal maturities within a reservoir interval can be integrated into the normal well log interpretation to discern differential sweep within the reservoir as well as identifying lateral and vertical scale of productive reservoir. This enables better recovery strategies (infill well drilling, well sidetracks, well recompletions, and well drilling pattern optimization), thus optimizing oil recovery.
- the methods herein allow the same analysis to be applied to any number of gas mixtures that contribute to a commingled gas mixture in a formation.
- the methods herein may reveal selective loss or thief zones of miscible gas which may indicate higher porosity/permeability bypass zones, faults, or permeability-anisotropic cap rocks or interbeds.
- averages of multiple pairs of carbon-based components may be used to provide a cumulative effect on the different carbon constituents of a gas mixture.
- the individual carbon constituents e.g. C1, C2, C3 give useful insight in themselves.
- the individual isotope trends can be used to estimate the mixing of a second gas by using a simplified strategy where the individual isotopes are used in mixing equations, without conversion to a calculated thermal maturity (R o ).
- composition of each wellbore sample may be determined as well. Determining the composition of each wellbore sample provides an operator with significantly more information for interpreting the data determined by the methods disclosed herein, including allowing an operator to more effectively match measured isotope values to reservoir architecture.
Landscapes
- Life Sciences & Earth Sciences (AREA)
- Chemical & Material Sciences (AREA)
- Engineering & Computer Science (AREA)
- Health & Medical Sciences (AREA)
- Physics & Mathematics (AREA)
- Immunology (AREA)
- Analytical Chemistry (AREA)
- Pathology (AREA)
- General Physics & Mathematics (AREA)
- General Health & Medical Sciences (AREA)
- Biochemistry (AREA)
- Food Science & Technology (AREA)
- Medicinal Chemistry (AREA)
- Geology (AREA)
- Environmental & Geological Engineering (AREA)
- General Life Sciences & Earth Sciences (AREA)
- Mining & Mineral Resources (AREA)
- Combustion & Propulsion (AREA)
- Chemical Kinetics & Catalysis (AREA)
- General Chemical & Material Sciences (AREA)
- Oil, Petroleum & Natural Gas (AREA)
- Remote Sensing (AREA)
- Fluid Mechanics (AREA)
- Geochemistry & Mineralogy (AREA)
- Other Investigation Or Analysis Of Materials By Electrical Means (AREA)
Abstract
Description
- This application is a continuation-in-part of Ser. No. 13/110,646, filed May 18, 2011, which is a non-provisional application which claims the benefit of and priority to U.S. Provisional Application Ser. No. 61/352,168 filed Jun. 7, 2010, entitled “Detection and Quantification of Gas Mixtures in Subterranean Formations,” each of which is hereby incorporated by reference in its entirety.
- The present invention relates generally to methods and systems for determining relative quantities of gas mixtures in a reservoir compartment of a subterranean formation. More particularly, but not by way of limitation, embodiments of the present invention include methods and systems for quantifying contributions to gas mixtures in a reservoir compartment by way of isotopic analyses.
- In producing hydrocarbons from subterranean formations, secondary recovery operations are often employed to enhance recovery of the hydrocarbons remaining in the subterranean formations. Secondary recovery operations usually refer to the second stage of hydrocarbon production, during which an external fluid such as water or gas is injected into the reservoir through injection wells located in the formation that is in fluid and pressure communication with the production wells. The purpose of secondary recovery is to maintain reservoir pressure and to displace hydrocarbons toward the producing wellbore.
- The most common secondary recovery techniques are gas injection and waterflooding. Normally, gas and/or water is injected into the production zone to sweep oil from the reservoir or to otherwise provide a motive pressure to enhance recovery. Typically, the secondary recovery stage reaches its limit when the injected fluid (water or gas) is produced in considerable amounts from the production wells and the production is no longer economical. Usually, the successive use of primary recovery and secondary recovery in an oil reservoir produces about 15% to 40% of the original oil in place.
- Where injected gas is used, a continuing challenge in the industry is determining whether the injected gas is reaching the producing wellbore. Additionally, it is often desired to quantitatively determine how much of the injected gas is reaching a particular producing wellbore. This information aids producers in knowing whether the injected gas is reaching its intended target and aids in determining when continuing secondary operations are becoming less economically viable.
- To complicate matters, subterranean formations often contain naturally-occurring gas mixtures which confuse or further complicate determination of the amount of injected gas that is reaching the production wellbore or wellbores. The presence of naturally-occurring formation gases complicates this quantification of the injected secondary sweep gas mixtures versus the naturally-occurring gas mixtures. Compositional techniques usually fail to adequately determine the relative contributions of these gas mixtures, because the naturally-occurring gas mixtures often contain one or more of the same components as the injected gas mixtures. Even where compositional techniques can provide some estimation of the relative contributions of each gas mixture, these technique estimates are too often unacceptably inaccurate.
- Conventional approaches to determining the presence of an injected gas include the use of chemical tracers. Occasionally, chemical tracers are employed to allocate production between reservoir compartments. Chemical tracers such as various radioactive isotopes, may be introduced to the reservoir by way of an injection well in communication with one or more of the reservoir compartments. By including a chemical tracer in the injected gas mixture, a producer can determine the presence of the injected gas mixture in the producing wellbore by analyzing the produced hydrocarbons for the chemical tracer. Alternatively, if desired, during drilling, samples may be extracted from the mud gas and analyzed for presence of the tracer to perform the same determination of a wellbore being drilled. One generally assumes that larger amounts of chemical tracer correspond to larger contributions of injected gas. Nevertheless, this conventional method is largely a qualitative determination and suffers from being unable to provide decent quantitative estimations of the relative amount of injected gas in the extracted hydrocarbons. Due to this method being notoriously unreliable for quantitative determinations, its use to date has been confined mostly to presence determinations and for qualitative assessments. Additionally, the tracer method is extremely expensive, making its use highly undesirable from a cost standpoint.
- Occasionally, a producer is faced with a related problem of determining how much of a naturally-occurring reservoir gas mixture is reaching a wellbore versus how much of an externally-introduced reservoir gas mixture is reaching the wellbore. The externally-introduced reservoir gas may be any gas that was introduced into the reservoir from some outside source and generally refers to any gas that was not naturally-formed or found in the production reservoir. Unfortunately, the conventional methods for addressing this more general problem suffers from the same limitations as the aforementioned prior art methods.
- Current methods for determining producer and injector well interactions generally consider just the time it takes for the externally introduced water or gases to reach a production well. This technique can be performed by examining neighboring production and injection wells, and their historical production and injection profiles. The historical profiles can be viewed as a chart or trend of information that can then be compared to neighboring wells to look for similar patterns of production performance related to injection. Once similar patterns are observed, a time estimate can be made, generally in months, and determination of which injection well has an influence on a neighboring production well can be made. Generally, no quantitative information exists in this technique to infer which specific intervals in the reservoir are or are not receiving water or external injection gases or pressure support. This technique may also be quite subjective and or ambiguous depending on the pattern matching capabilities of an interpreter or inconsistent nature of the paths that fluids can take within reservoir compartments that often contain unknown barriers and/or baffles to flow in different directions.
- Accordingly, there is a need in the art for improved systems and methods that address one or more disadvantages of the prior art for more accurately quantitatively quantifying contributions of gas mixtures in a reservoir.
- The present invention relates generally to methods and systems for determining relative quantities of gases contributing to gas mixtures in a reservoir compartment of a subterranean formation. More particularly, but not by way of limitation, embodiments of the present invention include methods and systems for quantifying contributions of gas mixtures in a reservoir compartment by way of isotopic analyses.
- One example of a method for determining relative contributions of a plurality of gas mixtures to a reservoir compartment of a subterranean formation comprises the steps of: (a) externally injecting a secondary gas mixture in the subterranean formation; (b) determining a first gas thermal maturity (Ro _ A) of a first gas mixture, wherein the first gas mixture contributes to a commingled gas mixture in the reservoir compartment; (c) determining a second gas thermal maturity (Ro _ B) of a second gas mixture, wherein the second gas mixture contributes to a commingled gas mixture in the reservoir compartment; (d) obtaining a plurality of samples of the commingled gas mixture at a plurality of depths, the commingled gas mixture at each depth characterized by a plurality of components, wherein the plurality of components comprises a plurality of carbon-based components, wherein each carbon-based component comprises a plurality of stable carbon isotopes; (e) analyzing each of the samples from each depth to determine a stable carbon isotope value (δ13C) for two or more of the carbon-based components of each sample; (f) determine a δ13C ratio of the stable carbon isotope value (δ13C) of a first carbon-based component to the stable carbon isotope value (δ13C) of a second carbon-based component, wherein the first carbon-based component is one of the two or more of the carbon-based components, and wherein the second carbon-based component is another of the two or more of the carbon-based components, wherein the δ13C ratio is determined at each of the plurality of depths; (g) determining a commingled gas mixture thermal maturity (Ro _ m) corresponding to the δ13C ratio determined in step (ff), wherein determining the commingled gas mixture thermal maturity (Ro _ m) is determined according to a known relationship of thermal maturity as a function of δ13C ratio; and (h) determining the relative contribution of the second gas mixture to the reservoir compartment by evaluating the quantity (Ro _ m−Ro _ A)/(Ro _ B−Ro _ A) or mathematical equivalent thereof to produce a second gas contribution (y) or determining the relative contribution of the second gas mixture to the comingled gas mixture using the determined Ro _ m, Ro _ A, and Ro _ B.
- One example of a method for determining relative contributions of a plurality of gas mixtures to a reservoir compartment of a subterranean formation comprises the steps of: (a) determining a first gas thermal maturity (Ro _ A) of a first gas mixture, wherein the first gas mixture contributes to a commingled gas mixture in the reservoir compartment; (b) determining a second gas thermal maturity (Ro _ B) of a second gas mixture, wherein the second gas mixture contributes to a commingled gas mixture in the reservoir compartment; (c) obtaining a plurality of samples of the commingled gas mixture at a plurality of depths, the commingled gas mixture at each depth characterized by a plurality of components, wherein the plurality of components comprises a plurality of carbon-based components, wherein each carbon-based component comprises a plurality of stable carbon isotopes; (d) analyzing each of the samples to determine a stable carbon isotope value (δ13C) of one of the carbon-based components of each sample; (e) determining a commingled gas mixture thermal maturity (Ro _ m) corresponding to the stable carbon isotope value (δ13C) determined in step (d) wherein determining the commingled gas mixture thermal maturity (Ro _ m) is determined according to a known relationship of thermal maturity as a function of stable carbon isotope values for the carbon-based component; and (f) determining the relative contribution of the second gas mixture to the reservoir compartment by evaluating the quantity (Ro _ m−Ro _ A)/(Ro _ B−Ro _ A) or mathematical equivalent thereof to produce a second gas contribution (y).
- Where a commingled gas mixture is characterized by a plurality of components, wherein the plurality of components comprises a plurality of carbon-based components, wherein each carbon-based component comprises a plurality of stable carbon isotopes, one example of a method for determining relative contributions of a plurality of gas mixtures to the commingled gas mixture in a reservoir compartment of a subterranean formation comprises the steps of: (a) receiving a first gas thermal maturity (Ro _ A) of a first gas mixture, wherein the first gas mixture contributes to a commingled gas mixture in the reservoir compartment; (b) receiving a second gas thermal maturity (Ro _ B) of a second gas mixture, wherein the second gas mixture contributes to a commingled gas mixture in the reservoir compartment; (c) receiving a stable carbon isotope value (δ13C) for two or more of the carbon-based components at each of the wellbore depths; (d) determine a δ13C ratio of the stable carbon isotope value (δ13C) of a first carbon-based component to the stable carbon isotope value (δ13C) of a second carbon-based component, wherein the first carbon-based component is one of the two or more of the carbon-based components, and wherein the second carbon-based component is another of the two or more of the carbon-based components, wherein the δ13C ratio is determined at each of the plurality of depths; (f) determining a commingled gas mixture thermal maturity (Ro _ m) corresponding to the δ13C ratio determined in step (d), wherein determining the commingled gas mixture thermal maturity (Ro _ m) is determined according to a known relationship of thermal maturity as a function of δ13C ratio; and (g) determining the relative contribution of the second gas mixture to the reservoir compartment by evaluating the quantity (Ro _ m−Ro _ A)/(Ro _ B−Ro _ A) or mathematical equivalent thereof to produce a second gas contribution (y).
- The features and advantages of the present invention will be apparent to those skilled in the art. While numerous changes may be made by those skilled in the art, such changes are within the spirit of the invention.
- A more complete understanding of the present disclosure and advantages thereof may be acquired by referring to the following description taken in conjunction with the accompanying figures, wherein:
-
FIG. 1A illustrates a wellbore disposed in a subterranean formation intersecting a plurality of reservoirs in accordance with one embodiment of the present invention. -
FIG. 1B illustrates a wellbore disposed in a subterranean formation intersecting a reservoir in accordance with one embodiment of the present invention. -
FIG. 2 illustrates a flow chart for a method for quantifying contributions of gas mixtures in a reservoir compartment in accordance with one embodiment of the present invention. -
FIG. 3 illustrates an alternative embodiment ofmethod 300 for quantifying contributions of gas mixtures to a reservoir compartment in accordance with one embodiment of the present invention. -
FIG. 4 shows a plot of a thermal maturity trend line against a graph of stable carbon isotope values (δ13C) of ethane versus stable carbon isotope values (δ13C) of propane. - While the present invention is susceptible to various modifications and alternative forms, specific exemplary embodiments thereof have been shown by way of example in the drawings and are herein described in detail. It should be understood, however, that the description herein of specific embodiments is not intended to limit the invention to the particular forms disclosed, but on the contrary, the intention is to cover all modifications, equivalents, and alternatives falling within the spirit and scope of the invention as defined by the appended claims.
- The present invention relates generally to methods and systems for determining relative quantities of gas mixtures in a reservoir compartment of a subterranean formation. More particularly, but not by way of limitation, embodiments of the present invention include methods and systems for quantifying contributions of gas mixtures in a reservoir compartment by way of isotopic analyses.
- Where more than one gas mixture contributes to the total gas mixture in a reservoir compartment, the methods and systems disclosed herein rely in part on the differing thermal maturities of the different gas mixtures to estimate the relative quantity of each gas mixture present in the total gas mixture. This method may be carried out at each depth to determine relative contributions of each gas mixture to the total gas mixture along the depth or length of a wellbore. The thermal maturities of each gas may be estimated by lab analysis and/or by reference to stable carbon isotopic analysis as described further below.
- In certain embodiments, the two gas mixtures of interest possess differing thermal maturities, due to the nature of the formation of each gas mixture under different geologic conditions. In this type of example, the methods and systems disclosed herein are capable of determining the relative contribution of each mixture to a commingled wellbore stream.
- Advantages of certain embodiments of the present invention include, but are not limited to, higher accuracies and ease of application as compared to conventional methods.
- Reference will now be made in detail to embodiments of the invention, one or more examples of which are illustrated in the accompanying drawings. Each example is provided by way of explanation of the invention, not as a limitation of the invention. It will be apparent to those skilled in the art that various modifications and variations can be made in the present invention without departing from the scope or spirit of the invention. For instance, features illustrated or described as part of one embodiment can be used on another embodiment to yield a still further embodiment. Thus, it is intended that the present invention cover such modifications and variations that come within the scope of the invention.
-
FIG. 1A illustrates a wellbore disposed in a subterranean formation intersecting a plurality of reservoirs in accordance with one embodiment of the present invention. Here,hydrocarbon producing wellbore 111 is disposed insubterranean formation 120.Wellbore 110 intersects two hydrocarbon-bearing reservoir compartments 131 and 132.Injection wellbore 141 is provided for injecting Gas B, which in certain embodiments may be a miscible injectant gas. Eachreservoir compartment reservoir compartment 131, for example, the commingled gas mixture reaching the wellbore at various depths results from the commingling of Gas A and Gas B. - In
reservoir compartment 132, on the other hand, the commingled gas mixture reaching producingwellbore 111 results from the commingling of Gas A and Gas C. Thus, due to reservoir connectivity and geology, gas mixtures reaching producingwellbore 111 will necessarily have different compositions resulting from different contributions of gas from other sources. -
FIG. 1B illustrates a wellbore disposed in a subterranean formation intersecting a reservoir in accordance with one embodiment of the present invention. In particular, wellbore 110 is disposed insubterranean formation 120 and intersectsreservoir compartment 131. -
Reservoir compartment 131 may be charged with multiple gas mixtures from different sources to form a commingled gas mixture. In some cases, a gas mixture might naturally-form inreservoir compartment 131. In other cases, gas mixtures may be introduced from another source external toreservoir compartment 131. While many combinations and permutations of this sort are possible, for illustrative purposes, this example discusses a first gas mixture inreservoir compartment 131 that originated from a first source (not shown) external toreservoir compartment 131. Here, a second gas mixture also contributes to the commingled gas mixture present inreservoir compartment 131. - The second gas mixture may be any externally-introduced gas that is present in
reservoir compartment 131 due to being introduced from some source external toreservoir compartment 131. In some cases, the second gas mixture may be an injected gas that is introduced intoreservoir compartment 131 for the purpose of one or more secondary recovery operations. In certain embodiments, the second gas mixture may be a gas mixture that was introduced intoreservoir compartment 131 by way of some other reservoir compartment (not shown) by natural or man-made mechanisms. In this example, a second gas mixture such as a miscible injectant gas is introduced via injection well 141 to sweep hydrocarbons towards producingwellbore 110. In some cases, the second gas mixture is preferably a miscible gas used to enhance recovery of hydrocarbons by way of a secondary recovery operation. - The quantification methods disclosed herein rely in part on the differing thermal maturities of the first gas mixture as compared to the second gas mixture. The differing thermal maturities of each gas mixture are due to geochemical differences between the gas mixtures owing to either (i) different source rock facies which generated the petroleum fluids that charged the different compartments, or (ii) similar source rock facies that charged the compartments at different stages of its thermal history, or (iii) a combination of these two geologic processes. Similarly, intra-reservoir alterations processes such as biodegradation, water washing, oil to gas cracking and other post-petroleum charge geologic processes may also affect chemical variation in the gas mixtures. Because the gas mixtures were subject to different geological conditions during their geologic evolution, the components of each gas mixture contain different distributions of carbon isotopes. That is, the first gas mixture may have hydrocarbon components containing more stable 13C carbon isotope as compared to 12C carbon isotope than the second gas mixture. Stable carbon isotope values referred to here are relative to the PeeDee Belemnite standard (PDB) and represented by
-
- As will be described further below, these differences in carbon isotope values allow estimation of the respective thermal maturities of each gas mixture of interest (e.g. the first gas mixture, the second gas mixture, and the commingled gas mixture). Additionally, as will be described further below, δ13C ratios of carbon isotope values of two carbon-based components may also be used to estimate the respective thermal maturities of each gas mixture. Knowing the thermal maturity of each of the gas mixtures then allows for quantitative estimation of the relative contributions of the first and second gas mixtures that produced the commingled wellbore gas mixture. These determinations may be carried out at a plurality of depths so as to estimate the relative contribution of each gas mixture as a function of wellbore depth. The term “depth,” as used herein, refers to any longitudinal length extending along a wellbore, and is not limited to vertical depths. In this way, the term, “depth,” equally applies to longitudinal wellbore lengths whether the well is vertical, deviated, or horizontal.
- Because the methods herein rely in part on differing thermal maturities of the first gas mixture as compared to the thermal maturity of the second gas mixture, the methods herein realize optimum efficacy when the first gas mixture and the second gas mixtures possess differing thermal maturities. In certain embodiments, the methods herein are capable of effectively determining relative contributions of each gas mixture to the commingled gas mixture with acceptable errors even when the thermal maturities differ from one another by no more than about 3 percent. Additionally, as will be apparent to a person of ordinary skill in the art with the benefit of this disclosure, the methods herein are extremely easy to implement in the field and are susceptible to being incorporated in automated devices at the wellbore site for providing logs of relative contributions of each gas as a function of wellbore depth.
-
FIG. 2 illustrates a flow chart formethod 200 for quantifying contributions of gas mixtures to a reservoir compartment in accordance with one embodiment of the present invention.Method 200 is explained with reference to the system shown inFIG. 1 . As described above, a first gas mixture (not shown) and a second gas mixture (not shown) each contribute to chargingreservoir compartment 131 to form commingledgas mixture 115. -
Method 200 realizes optimal efficacy when the thermal maturity of the first gas mixture differs from the thermal maturity of the second gas mixture by some threshold tolerance level. In certain embodiments, the threshold tolerance level is at least about 2%, at least about 3%, or at least about 5%. - In
step 210, the thermal maturity (Ro _ A) of the first gas mixture is determined, and instep 212, the thermal maturity (Ro _ B) of the second gas mixture is determined. This thermal maturity determination may be by way of lab analysis or other method known in the art for determining thermal maturity of a gas mixture. In certain embodiments, one or more stable carbon isotope values are measured and then, a thermal maturity is determined by reference to a known relationship between the stable carbon isotope value(s) and thermal maturity. In certain embodiments, this known relationship is a linear relationship. - In
step 226, samples of commingledgas mixture 115 are obtained at a plurality of wellbore depths. In certain embodiments, the gas samples are obtained at various wellbore depth intervals as the wellbore is being drilled. Asdrilling rig 106 extends wellbore 110 to greater depths, samples may be obtained at a plurality of depths along the length ofwellbore 110. In certain embodiments, mixture samples may be obtained from returning rock cuttings anddrilling mud 150, which degases frommud receiving tank 151 by way ofdegassing tank 153. In some cases,mud gas 154 from the return drill fluid is sampled as substantially representative of the commingled gas mixture present at each wellbore depth being sampled. Sampling may be by way of asampling apparatus 160 or by an on-site analyzer 157. Sampling may be desired at frequencies sufficient to minimize sample-to-sample variability to ensure a high enough resolution of measurement (e.g. to less than about 3 percent in certain embodiments). Depending on the reservoir architecture, sufficient sampling frequencies may vary from regular intervals of about every 5 feet, about every 10 feet, to about every 50 feet. Whichever sampling frequency is selected for a given portion of the wellbore, the wellbore sampling frequency selected should be sufficiently high to reflect any changes in reservoir architecture. - Each of the samples thus obtained are analyzed by way of
isotopic analyzer 157 instep 226 to obtain stable carbon isotope values (δ13C) for one or more carbon-based components that make up commingledgas mixture 115. Alternatively,sample devices 165 may be separately analyzed in an on-site or off-site laboratory as desired. Each of the stable carbon isotope values obtained at each wellbore depth is indicative of the thermal maturity of commingledgas mixture 115 at each respective wellbore depth. Generally, the higher stable carbon isotope values are indicative of hydrocarbons having higher thermal maturities. - Thermal maturities are known to correlate well with stable carbon isotope values for each carbon-based component (e.g. with methane, ethane, propane, iso-butane, n-butane, etc.) that are found in gas mixtures. Accordingly, thermal maturities may be estimated for a given gas mixture based on a stable carbon isotope value (δ13C) for a particular carbon-based component (e.g. ethane) by reference to the known relationship between thermal maturity and stable carbon isotopes values. Suitable examples of known relationships of thermal maturity as a function of stable carbon isotopes values are shown in Berner and Faber, Maturity related mixing model for methane, ethane, and propane, based on carbon isotopes, Advances in Organic Geochemistry (1987). Known relationships for other carbon-based components may be determined as desired for use in conjunction with the methods disclosed herein.
- Once the thermal maturities of the first gas mixture, the second gas mixture, and commingled
gas mixture 115 are known, the relative contribution of the second gas mixture to commingledgas mixture 115 may be determined as provided instep 240. Similarly, the relative contribution of the first gas mixture to commingledgas mixture 115 may be determined as well. - Indeed, for the system illustrated in
FIG. 1 , where a first gas mixture and a second gas mixture that contribute to charging commingledgas mixture 115, the relative contribution of the first and second gas mixtures are characterized by the following system of equations: -
(x)(R o _ A)+(y)(R o _ B)=R o _ m [Equation 1] -
x+y=1 [Equation 2] -
- wherein x is the relative contribution of the first gas mixture,
- wherein y is the relative contribution of the second gas mixture,
- wherein Ro _ A is the thermal maturity of the first gas mixture,
- wherein Ro _ B is the thermal maturity of the second gas mixture, and
- wherein Ro _ m is the thermal maturity of the mixed reservoir gases.
- The relative contribution of each gas mixture may be determined by simultaneously solving this system of equations. Obviously, the above system of equations may be any mathematically equivalent operation that yields substantially the same result, including but not limited to solving the equations algebraically. Other numerical techniques may be employed to solve for the unknowns x and y as well as desired. The term, “mathematical equivalent thereof,” as used herein, refers to any mathematical operation that solves for the relative contributions of the gas mixtures to a commingled gas mixture based on the equations described herein. Where algebraic substitution is employed, the relative contribution of the second gas mixture is given by the relationship, (Ro _ m−Ro _ A)/(Ro _ B−Ro _ A). The relative contribution of the first gas mixture may then be ascertained by reference to x=1−y, since the sum of the fraction contributions of each gas mixture sum to unity.
- The method thus described may also be extended to any number of gas mixtures where each gas mixture contributes to a commingled gas mixture, provided enough stable carbon isotope values are measured for enough of the components to solve for the number of unknowns inherent in the system of interest.
-
FIG. 3 illustrates an alternative embodiment ofmethod 300 for quantifying contributions of gas mixtures to a reservoir compartment in accordance with one embodiment of the present invention. For illustrative purposes,method 300 is explained with reference toFIG. 1 . - In contrast to
method 200,method 300 contemplates receiving gas thermal maturities from another entity that has independently ascertained the gas thermal maturities, as opposed to sampling and analyzing commingledgas mixture 115. Accordingly, in step 310 a thermal maturity (Ro _ A) of a first gas mixture is received, and instep 312, a thermal maturity (Ro _ B) of a second gas mixture is received. - In
step 326, stable carbon isotope values (δ13C) are obtained for two or more carbon-based components corresponding to each wellbore depth. For example, a stable carbon isotope value (δ13C) of methane and a stable carbon isotope value (δ13C) of ethane may be obtained corresponding to each wellbore depth. Indeed, any pair of carbon-based components may be obtained in this fashion, such as, for example, methane/ethane, methane/propane, methane/n-butane, ethane/propane, ethane/n-butane, propane/n-butane, methane/iso-butane, and so forth. For the selected pair of carbon-based components selected, a δ13C ratio is determined by evaluating a ratio of the stable carbon isotope value (δ13C) of the first carbon-based component to the stable carbon isotope value (δ13C) of the second carbon-based component. In this way, a δ13C ratio of the δ13C value of a first component to δ13C of a second component is obtained corresponding to each wellbore depth. - Each of the δ13C ratios thus obtained may be used to estimate a thermal maturity of commingled
gas mixture 115 at each wellbore depth as provided instep 330. Instep 330, the thermal maturity (Ro _ m) of commingledgas mixture 115 is determined according to a known relationship between the commingled gas mixture thermal maturity (Ro _ m) and the δ13C ratios. - To illustrate one example of this technique for relating thermal maturity of a gas mixture to a δ13C ratio of a pair of carbon-based components, reference is made to
FIG. 4 .FIG. 4 shows a plot of a thermal maturity trend line against a graph of stable carbon isotope values (δ13C) of ethane versus stable carbon isotope values (δ13C) of propane. An increase in Ro represents an increase in thermal maturity of the gas source. As evidenced by this plot, thermal maturity increases with increasing δ13C ratio. Here, δ13C ethane/propane ratios at a particular wellbore depth may be indicated on the same plot. - As one example, on
FIG. 4 , a δ13C ethane/propane ratio of a first gas mixture is plotted aspoint 491, a δ13C ethane/propane ratio of a second gas mixture is plotted aspoint 492, and a δ13C ethane/propane ratio of commingled gas mixture is plotted aspoint 499, each of these δ13C ratios being evaluated at a particular wellbore depth. The thermal maturities corresponding to each of thesepoints maturity trend line 485 and ascertaining the corresponding thermal maturity at the intersection of eachnormal line trend line 485. In this way, a thermal maturity of each gas mixture is obtained. - Other equivalent mathematical techniques may be employed to determine the thermal maturity from δ13C ratios as desired. Each mathematical technique, however, relies on a known relationship between thermal maturity and δ13C ratios.
- Upon determining the thermal maturities of each gas, the contributions of each gas mixture to commingled
gas mixture 115 may be determined instep 330 in any manner similar to step 240 ofmethod 200. In this way, the methods herein allow for an integrative assessment of oil sweeping efficiency across an entire interval of interest, including newly drilled wells within the range of migration of injected miscible gas. The profile of thermal maturities within a reservoir interval can be integrated into the normal well log interpretation to discern differential sweep within the reservoir as well as identifying lateral and vertical scale of productive reservoir. This enables better recovery strategies (infill well drilling, well sidetracks, well recompletions, and well drilling pattern optimization), thus optimizing oil recovery. More generally, the methods herein allow the same analysis to be applied to any number of gas mixtures that contribute to a commingled gas mixture in a formation. In this fashion, the methods herein may reveal selective loss or thief zones of miscible gas which may indicate higher porosity/permeability bypass zones, faults, or permeability-anisotropic cap rocks or interbeds. - In certain embodiments, averages of multiple pairs of carbon-based components may be used to provide a cumulative effect on the different carbon constituents of a gas mixture. The individual carbon constituents (e.g. C1, C2, C3) give useful insight in themselves. For gas mixtures where the individual isotopes for C1, C2, or C3 or C3+ higher carbon numbers cannot be accurately measured, then the individual isotope trends can be used to estimate the mixing of a second gas by using a simplified strategy where the individual isotopes are used in mixing equations, without conversion to a calculated thermal maturity (Ro).
- Optionally, the composition of each wellbore sample may be determined as well. Determining the composition of each wellbore sample provides an operator with significantly more information for interpreting the data determined by the methods disclosed herein, including allowing an operator to more effectively match measured isotope values to reservoir architecture.
- It is explicitly recognized that any of the elements and features of each of the devices described herein are capable of use with any of the other devices described herein with no limitation. Furthermore, it is explicitly recognized that the steps of the methods herein may be performed in any order except unless explicitly stated otherwise or inherently required otherwise by the particular method.
- Therefore, the present invention is well adapted to attain the ends and advantages mentioned as well as those that are inherent therein. The particular embodiments disclosed above are illustrative only, as the present invention may be modified and practiced in different but equivalent manners apparent to those skilled in the art having the benefit of the teachings herein. Furthermore, no limitations are intended to the details of construction or design herein shown, other than as described in the claims below. It is therefore evident that the particular illustrative embodiments disclosed above may be altered or modified and all such variations and equivalents are considered within the scope and spirit of the present invention.
Claims (21)
Priority Applications (1)
Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
---|---|---|---|
US16/234,850 US11105786B2 (en) | 2010-06-07 | 2018-12-28 | Detection and quantification of gas mixtures in subterranean formations |
Applications Claiming Priority (3)
Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
---|---|---|---|
US35216810P | 2010-06-07 | 2010-06-07 | |
US13/110,646 US20110301866A1 (en) | 2010-06-07 | 2011-05-18 | Detection and Quantification of Gas Mixtures in Subterranean Formations |
US16/234,850 US11105786B2 (en) | 2010-06-07 | 2018-12-28 | Detection and quantification of gas mixtures in subterranean formations |
Related Parent Applications (1)
Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
---|---|---|---|
US13/110,646 Continuation-In-Part US20110301866A1 (en) | 2010-06-07 | 2011-05-18 | Detection and Quantification of Gas Mixtures in Subterranean Formations |
Publications (2)
Publication Number | Publication Date |
---|---|
US20190137472A1 true US20190137472A1 (en) | 2019-05-09 |
US11105786B2 US11105786B2 (en) | 2021-08-31 |
Family
ID=66328462
Family Applications (1)
Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
---|---|---|---|
US16/234,850 Active US11105786B2 (en) | 2010-06-07 | 2018-12-28 | Detection and quantification of gas mixtures in subterranean formations |
Country Status (1)
Country | Link |
---|---|
US (1) | US11105786B2 (en) |
Cited By (1)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
US11525822B2 (en) | 2020-03-16 | 2022-12-13 | Baker Hughes Oilfield Operations Llc | Quantifying operational inefficiencies utilizing natural gasses and stable isotopes |
Citations (10)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
US4941533A (en) * | 1989-05-16 | 1990-07-17 | The University Of Kansas | Subterranean permeability modification by using microbial polysaccharide polymers |
US5168927A (en) * | 1991-09-10 | 1992-12-08 | Shell Oil Company | Method utilizing spot tracer injection and production induced transport for measurement of residual oil saturation |
US5306909A (en) * | 1991-04-04 | 1994-04-26 | Schlumberger Technology Corporation | Analysis of drilling fluids |
US20070169540A1 (en) * | 2001-06-02 | 2007-07-26 | Sterner Steven M | Method and apparatus for determining gas content of subsurface fluids for oil and gas exploration |
US20080306695A1 (en) * | 2007-05-04 | 2008-12-11 | Luc Fusetti | Method for determining a gas compositional origin from carbon material thermal degradation |
US20100161302A1 (en) * | 2008-12-23 | 2010-06-24 | Walters Clifford C | Method For Predicting Petroleum Expulsion |
US20100212399A1 (en) * | 2007-10-23 | 2010-08-26 | Dean John Richards | Gas analyzer |
US20100326651A1 (en) * | 2009-06-30 | 2010-12-30 | Bp Corporation North America Inc. | Isotopic identification of production by individual formations in commingled gas wells |
US20110091979A1 (en) * | 2008-03-12 | 2011-04-21 | University Of Wyoming | Tracing Coalbed Natural Gas - Coproduced Water Using Stable Isotopes of Carbon |
US20110250582A1 (en) * | 2008-08-01 | 2011-10-13 | Ian Donald Gates | Methods and systems for gas production from a reservoir |
Family Cites Families (5)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
US7124030B2 (en) | 2004-05-14 | 2006-10-17 | Leroy Ellis | Mud gas isotope logging interpretive method in oil and gas drilling operations |
US7174254B2 (en) | 2004-05-14 | 2007-02-06 | Leroy Ellis | Mud gas isotope logging interpretative process utilizing mixing lines in oil and gas drilling operations |
US7438128B2 (en) | 2005-05-04 | 2008-10-21 | Halliburton Energy Services, Inc. | Identifying zones of origin of annular gas pressure |
US20080135236A1 (en) | 2006-04-10 | 2008-06-12 | Martin Schoell | Method and Apparatus for Characterizing Gas Production |
EP2304174A4 (en) * | 2008-05-22 | 2015-09-23 | Schlumberger Technology Bv | UNDERGROUND MEASUREMENT OF TRAINING CHARACTERISTICS DURING DRILLING |
-
2018
- 2018-12-28 US US16/234,850 patent/US11105786B2/en active Active
Patent Citations (10)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
US4941533A (en) * | 1989-05-16 | 1990-07-17 | The University Of Kansas | Subterranean permeability modification by using microbial polysaccharide polymers |
US5306909A (en) * | 1991-04-04 | 1994-04-26 | Schlumberger Technology Corporation | Analysis of drilling fluids |
US5168927A (en) * | 1991-09-10 | 1992-12-08 | Shell Oil Company | Method utilizing spot tracer injection and production induced transport for measurement of residual oil saturation |
US20070169540A1 (en) * | 2001-06-02 | 2007-07-26 | Sterner Steven M | Method and apparatus for determining gas content of subsurface fluids for oil and gas exploration |
US20080306695A1 (en) * | 2007-05-04 | 2008-12-11 | Luc Fusetti | Method for determining a gas compositional origin from carbon material thermal degradation |
US20100212399A1 (en) * | 2007-10-23 | 2010-08-26 | Dean John Richards | Gas analyzer |
US20110091979A1 (en) * | 2008-03-12 | 2011-04-21 | University Of Wyoming | Tracing Coalbed Natural Gas - Coproduced Water Using Stable Isotopes of Carbon |
US20110250582A1 (en) * | 2008-08-01 | 2011-10-13 | Ian Donald Gates | Methods and systems for gas production from a reservoir |
US20100161302A1 (en) * | 2008-12-23 | 2010-06-24 | Walters Clifford C | Method For Predicting Petroleum Expulsion |
US20100326651A1 (en) * | 2009-06-30 | 2010-12-30 | Bp Corporation North America Inc. | Isotopic identification of production by individual formations in commingled gas wells |
Cited By (1)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
US11525822B2 (en) | 2020-03-16 | 2022-12-13 | Baker Hughes Oilfield Operations Llc | Quantifying operational inefficiencies utilizing natural gasses and stable isotopes |
Also Published As
Publication number | Publication date |
---|---|
US11105786B2 (en) | 2021-08-31 |
Similar Documents
Publication | Publication Date | Title |
---|---|---|
CA2741763C (en) | Detection and quantification of gas mixtures in subterranean formations | |
EP3414566B1 (en) | Thermal maturity determination of rock formations using mud gas isotope logging | |
EP3426891B1 (en) | Estimation of formation properties based on borehole fluid and drilling logs | |
US7529626B1 (en) | Method of integration and displaying of information derived from a mud gas isotope logging interpretative process in association with geophysical and other logs from oil and gas drilling operations | |
US10534871B2 (en) | Method and systems for reservoir modeling, evaluation and simulation | |
CA2741791C (en) | Hydrocarbon production allocation methods and systems | |
US20050256647A1 (en) | Mud gas isotope logging interpretative process utilizing mixing lines in oil and gas drilling operations | |
US11002722B2 (en) | Time-series geochemistry in unconventional plays | |
Canbaz et al. | Optimization of Development of Heavy Oil Reservoirs through Geochemical Characterization | |
US11105786B2 (en) | Detection and quantification of gas mixtures in subterranean formations | |
Elshahawi et al. | Combining continuous fluid typing, wireline formation testers, and geochemical measurements for an improved understanding of reservoir architecture | |
Elshahawi et al. | Integration of Geochemical, Mud-Gas, and Downhole-Fluid Analyses for the Assessment of Compositional Grading—Case Studies | |
Stiles et al. | Design and Operation of a CO2 Tertiary Pilot: Means San Andres Unit | |
Adams et al. | Estimating recovery by quantifying mobile oil and geochemically allocating production in source rock reservoirs | |
Dong et al. | Improved interpretation of reservoir architecture and fluid contacts through the integration of downhole fluid analysis with geochemical and mud gas analyses | |
Torres-Verdín et al. | History matching of multiphase-flow formation-tester measurements acquired with focused-sampling probes in deviated wells | |
Thomas et al. | The scope and perspective of ROS measurement and flood monitoring | |
Datir et al. | Realization of reservoir of fluid geodynamics with the integration of petrophysics and downhole fluid analysis | |
Shutang et al. | Combination of WFT and Conventional Well Testing Methods to Effectively Reduce the Time for Hydrocarbons Exploration in Tight and Fractured Suprasalt Carbonates Field in West Kazakhstan | |
Manuaba et al. | Real-Time Reservoir Characterization: The Identification of Sweet Spots Through New Measurement | |
Mattar et al. | Enhanced Integration to Characterize Heavy Oil in Complex Environment | |
Abdul Wahab et al. | Fluid Mapping-While-Drilling De-Risks Reservoir and Fluid Data Acquisition Workflow in a Brown Field | |
Pisharat et al. | Reducing Uncertainties and Improving Hydrocarbon Recovery in Brownfields Through an Innovative Integrated Workflow | |
Courel et al. | Identifying and Assessing Productivity in CO2 Bearing Gas Zones Using Wireline Logging and Testing Data | |
Bravo et al. | A Novel Method to Map Heavy Oil Viscosity From Standard Mud Gas–A Field Case From the Peregrino Field |
Legal Events
Date | Code | Title | Description |
---|---|---|---|
FEPP | Fee payment procedure |
Free format text: ENTITY STATUS SET TO UNDISCOUNTED (ORIGINAL EVENT CODE: BIG.); ENTITY STATUS OF PATENT OWNER: LARGE ENTITY |
|
STPP | Information on status: patent application and granting procedure in general |
Free format text: NON FINAL ACTION MAILED |
|
STPP | Information on status: patent application and granting procedure in general |
Free format text: RESPONSE TO NON-FINAL OFFICE ACTION ENTERED AND FORWARDED TO EXAMINER |
|
STPP | Information on status: patent application and granting procedure in general |
Free format text: FINAL REJECTION MAILED |
|
STPP | Information on status: patent application and granting procedure in general |
Free format text: DOCKETED NEW CASE - READY FOR EXAMINATION |
|
STPP | Information on status: patent application and granting procedure in general |
Free format text: NON FINAL ACTION MAILED |
|
STPP | Information on status: patent application and granting procedure in general |
Free format text: RESPONSE AFTER FINAL ACTION FORWARDED TO EXAMINER |
|
AS | Assignment |
Owner name: CONOCOPHILLIPS COMPANY, TEXAS Free format text: ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST;ASSIGNORS:HOLBA, ALBERT G.;STRAPOC, DARIUSZ;KLEIBACKER, DERIK W.;AND OTHERS;SIGNING DATES FROM 20200311 TO 20200916;REEL/FRAME:053938/0346 |
|
STPP | Information on status: patent application and granting procedure in general |
Free format text: NON FINAL ACTION MAILED |
|
STPP | Information on status: patent application and granting procedure in general |
Free format text: NOTICE OF ALLOWANCE MAILED -- APPLICATION RECEIVED IN OFFICE OF PUBLICATIONS |
|
STPP | Information on status: patent application and granting procedure in general |
Free format text: PUBLICATIONS -- ISSUE FEE PAYMENT RECEIVED |
|
STCB | Information on status: application discontinuation |
Free format text: ABANDONED -- FAILURE TO PAY ISSUE FEE |
|
STCF | Information on status: patent grant |
Free format text: PATENTED CASE |
|
MAFP | Maintenance fee payment |
Free format text: PAYMENT OF MAINTENANCE FEE, 4TH YEAR, LARGE ENTITY (ORIGINAL EVENT CODE: M1551); ENTITY STATUS OF PATENT OWNER: LARGE ENTITY Year of fee payment: 4 |